Jump to content

Menu

Mom in Va. who lived through Cultural Revolution addresses school board regarding Critical Race Theory


Recommended Posts

https://www.foxnews.com/us/virginia-xi-van-fleet-critical-race-theory-china-cultural-revolution-loudoun

I am sure some will, as usual, attack the source (Foxnews.com) . The video is of the mother speaking about the parallels she sees with CRT and what she experienced in her childhood in China.

The link below is a teacher speaking before the same school board. This too has the video of her speech. 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/teacher-confronts-loudoun-county-school-board-progressive-agenda

And another parent addressing this school board

https://www.foxnews.com/us/virginia-parents-loudoun-school-board-graphic-books-critical-race-theory

You will need to scroll down to see this video

I am sure there will be claims that this is only happening in this particular county, and this is not what CRT really is. 

Edited by Fritz
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 871
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Confession: I will say this board can be super intimidating. I often feel like I am heading into battle because I don’t always fall into the same line of thinking other people here do.  I often s

No, there’s not. But there is a huge disconnect between what Republican politicians want and what Republican voters want, so Fox News must find something to anger and confuse people, and this is what

What Fox News says is “critical race theory” is not at all what I learned about in my sociology classes (sociology major).  We learned that race is a social construct.  It comes from the study of law

Way back when I was a college writing tutor I had a student in a religious studies class who brought his paper assignment to me extremely distraught because it was a biblical criticism paper and he thought that meant he was supposed to write negative things about the Bible.  He was very relieved when I explained that “criticism” in this context means analyze carefully with attention to detail, not badmouth.

It seems like a lot of people are making the same mistake (or deliberately propagating it) with regard to critical race theory.  Someone said something negative about white people in a school setting, it must be critical race theory!  

  • Like 21
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, not at all. Although I did not say "I'm so sure" . Go ahead argue away that this is not what CRT really is. I have noticed the dismissiveness of some on this board to deflect by slamming the source rather than speak to the topic at hand.

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Danae said:

Way back when I was a college writing tutor I had a student in a religious studies class who brought his paper assignment to me extremely distraught because it was a biblical criticism paper and he thought that meant he was supposed to write negative things about the Bible.  He was very relieved when I explained that “criticism” in this context means analyze carefully with attention to detail, not badmouth.

It seems like a lot of people are making the same mistake (or deliberately propagating it) with regard to critical race theory.  Someone said something negative about white people in a school setting, it must be critical race theory!  

This is what I am trying to figure out.  Seems like there is a lot of confusion over what CRT actually is.  I mean is there an actual course in schools teaching 'CRT'?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the source is bad, why should we waste time on it, Fritz? We all evaluate sources. That's a perfectly sensible and reasonable thing to do.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

This is what I am trying to figure out.  Seems like there is a lot of confusion over what CRT actually is.  I mean is there an actual course in schools teaching 'CRT'?

So where are you seeing confusion? Like what specifically  have you seen that is using or defining CRT erroneously?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

This is what I am trying to figure out.  Seems like there is a lot of confusion over what CRT actually is.  I mean is there an actual course in schools teaching 'CRT'?

No, there’s not. But there is a huge disconnect between what Republican politicians want and what Republican voters want, so Fox News must find something to anger and confuse people, and this is what they’ve settled on.

Literally it means history is inherently biased. This is not a new or controversial idea, but it does scare people who care more about pride, patriotism, or American exceptionalism than they do the truth. 

Edited by Katy
At least this typo isn’t as bad as yesterday’s!
  • Like 16
  • Thanks 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's important to discuss things like this.  

But I have to ask, what's your goal for being here, Fritz?  You seem to be trying your best to sew division and discord among the various members here who hold different beliefs.   Is that your end goal?    Do you do that in personal, irl relationships, as well?   

If you're looking for a group that only discusses politics and controversial topics, perhaps this board isn't for you.    

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, pinball said:

So where are you seeing confusion? Like what specifically  have you seen that is using or defining CRT erroneously?

That article listed above paints it very differently than what Katie described it as.  Or what Wikipedia shows, or the ABA website or this article  https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-attack/2021/05

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, pinball said:

So where are you seeing confusion? Like what specifically  have you seen that is using or defining CRT erroneously?

Mostly I’m not seeing people who are upset about it define it at all. The main thing I keep hearing is that they’re going to “teach whites kids to feel guilty for being white.” So I’m wondering @Fritz, since you’ve brought race up many times on many threads and started this one, how do you define critical race theory?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

That article listed above paints it very differently than what Katie described it as.  Or what Wikipedia shows, or the ABA website or this article  https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-attack/2021/05

 

Katy? What?

i want to know what you know, Katie Scarlett! LOL...get it? That was the GWTW character’s given name...but really, what have you seen personally where people use it wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I only plan to homeschool, I don’t have to read up on all of the latest policy/trends/fads the ps system is up to. I will go out on a limb and say when ps picks up something they go way overboard to the point of losing the original intent. <Insert latest education reform or fad here>

Can anyone give a definition of critical race theory, some good and bad examples of it in ps? What should I look for?

Just so we’re all talking about the the same thing. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, pinball said:

Katy? What?

i want to know what you know, Katie Scarlett! LOL...get it? That was the GWTW character’s given name...but really, what have you seen personally where people use it wrong?

I am not sure....I just know when I try reading up on definitions and then make sense of why Fox reports that CRT is like China.....I can't figure out what is going on, and usually when that happens it all boils down to politics.

And I had forgotten that Scarlett's first name was Katie.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:



But I have to ask, what's your goal for being here, Fritz?  You seem to be trying your best to sew division and discord among the various members here who hold different beliefs.   Is that your end goal?    Do you do that in personal, irl relationships, as well?   

If you're looking for a group that only discusses politics and controversial topics, perhaps this board isn't for you.    

Yes, it's interesting that the only threads you @Fritz start are about controversial topics - ones that you know in advance will bring controversy. What is your purpose here? Many but not all of the people here homeschool. Some are finished homeschooling, some send their kids to public or private school, and some have a mix of homeschooled and brick & mortar schooled kids. We discuss controversial topics to be sure but we also discuss our kids (young as well as the adult ones), grandchildren, kitchen gadgets, recipes, selling/buying a house, what shoes to wear to a theme park, and a host of other topics. Your only topics are about controversial issues. Reasons?

Edited by Lady Florida.
  • Like 17
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fritz said:

Nope, not at all. Although I did not say "I'm so sure" . Go ahead argue away that this is not what CRT really is. I have noticed the dismissiveness of some on this board to deflect by slamming the source rather than speak to the topic at hand.

This is because the sources that you often cite are not credible. 

Bring something credible to the table and maybe you'll get a better response. 

For starters, how about citing an academic source about CRT. What is it? Someone adding a school board is not credible. She can discuss parallels she sees. No one will dismiss that. But that's just her opinion. 

 

Edited by Ordinary Shoes
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Bring someone to the table and maybe you'll get a better response. 

 

Amen.

Or maybe just, you know, start a real discussion.  She has started many of these threads with "here's a link to something that will shock and offend you, but I'm not going to tell you what it is".  I don't click on links without context just to be shocked or offended.  I don't need to be told there is shocking and offensive stuff on the internet.

 

Maybe instead, she could say "There is systemic racism in the US because of A, B, and C, and this is what we can do about it".  Feel free to use links as evidence for you position, but the position should be in the post.

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What Fox News says is “critical race theory” is not at all what I learned about in my sociology classes (sociology major).  We learned that race is a social construct.  It comes from the study of law and the way “racism is built into and reproduced through institutions that organize every day life, particularly the law”.  Seems a rather sensible thing to study and an odd thing to be mad about today, since it’s been around since the 70s.  It’s not even specifically about people being racist, it’s more about ways that systems are set up in a way that negatively impacts POC, often inadvertently but sometime purposefully.   That just plain doesn’t feel controversial.  

Edited by HeartString
  • Like 21
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you were looking for actual conversation, saying things like "I'm sure some will, as usual, attack the source" and "I am sure there will be claims that..." isn't the way to go about it, because you are preemptively dismissing objections as being based on bias or "claims".

Now, you can of course reply to me and say that you were just trying to skip the first round of objections and get to the meat of the issue, but the tone used is dismissive of any contrary opinion so that plausible deniability isn't worth much. If you don't see it, I think you may not be ready for actual in depth conversations. Starting off with a link and a vague poke at the bear is not a conversation starter: if you have a position, spell it out yourself without relying on a link and have the rest of us making assumptions of what we're actually discussing. Links are for reference or further reading, not a bulk of a conversation opener.

So, I don't see this as a genuine conversation starter, as much as a controversy stirrer. Which can be fun, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather get into a lively debate over the best type of frosting or if we're responsible for putting random stray carts into the the cart corral at the store. I'm sure some will, as usual, think that fondant is actually edible but it certainly isn't... 😛 

eta: had a sentence fragment. plus added a sentence.

Edited by Moonhawk
  • Like 14
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the links because they can't show what the OP claimed they did. They can't show was CRT is. 

However, they can show what people perceive CRT to be and how it might be manifesting in their particular schools. That's useful information and there could be an interesting discussion here about the goals of the CRT and what it's like in actual classrooms. The videos of parents would be relevant to that discussion. 

This is an education focused board so we've plenty of discussions about how educational ideas are translated in the classroom. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Confession:

I will say this board can be super intimidating. I often feel like I am heading into battle because I don’t always fall into the same line of thinking other people here do.  I often start to post something and think better of it. Half the time I don’t think I get my point across as clearly as I would like. I am often under a time constraint and hit post before I am ready. I can understand preparing for an onslaught of posts that don’t address what I really want to talk about and instead focus on one thing I said for pages. And I’ve been on this forum for ages. 

Maybe instead of pages harping on about how she presented it, can we just talk about it? I’d really like to know what all of you think it’s about vs how it’s represented. Are schools taking it too far? Not far enough? 

  • Like 23
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fritz said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/virginia-xi-van-fleet-critical-race-theory-china-cultural-revolution-loudoun

I am sure some will, as usual, attack the source (Foxnews.com) . The video is of the mother speaking about the parallels she sees with CRT and what she experienced in her childhood in China.

 

Since this is basically an editorial by Fox featuring the mother with them adding Patrick Henry’s quote and other editorial comments including that “The Loudoun County school board has doubled down on its embrace of left-wing policies, including CRT, in recent months.”  I’m not sure why you think people would attack the source unless one doesn’t like to read editorials from a variety of sources. They chose a topic for their editorial and then found people and events to support it.

 

It reminds me of lots of stuff I read before the last election. People who grew up in another country (eg Cuba, Germany, Russia, former Soviet Union, etc. ) strongly supporting one candidate or the other and explaining their reasons based on their lived experiences and their interpretation of what led to the negative political things that happened there. Personally, even when I disagree with their conclusions, I always think it’s a good idea to hear different perspectives.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Plum said:

Confession:

I will say this board can be super intimidating. I often feel like I am heading into battle because I don’t always fall into the same line of thinking other people here do.  I often start to post something and think better of it. Half the time I don’t think I get my point across as clearly as I would like. I am often under a time constraint and hit post before I am ready. I can understand preparing for an onslaught of posts that don’t address what I really want to talk about and instead focus on one thing I said for pages. And I’ve been on this forum for ages. 

Maybe instead of pages harping on about how she presented it, can we just talk about it? I’d really like to know what all of you think it’s about vs how it’s represented. Are schools taking it too far? Not far enough? 

Plum, this isn't directed at you; I just want to clarify why I am not wanting to engage on this particular thread. It's not the topic as much as the original intent.

Yeah, a lot of us are piling on the intent aspect of this, that's true. But since the OP hasn't given us a real definition, purpose, concern, or much more than some links, what are we supposed to talk about? I don't want to get into a whole conversation and then 35 posts down OP comes back with "but that isn't what I meant" or "that's not what CRT is" when they refused to give that in the first place. It gives them an out of the conversation and a way to turn the conversation into an example of being misunderstood or "but I didn't say that" and I guess that'd be true because they didn't really say anything.

I guess I'm more suspicious of traps right now. I have participated in good faith on other threads so it's not like this is a default reaction for me; this one in particular feels too incomplete to trust though.

Also, I don't have the time for 4 links, including a video that I can't listen to but am told I need to see, in order to get a glimmer of what we're actually talking about. "But did you even read the 3rd link?" is not something I want to come back to later.

eta: I agree the board can be intimidating and I still only post maybe 1/3 of what I write. But for me it's not because I'm afraid the battle, or offended by it, as much as I don't have the time and half of what I write out are ramblings as I work out my own position myself based on other posts (and I try to only post if I feel I'll add to the convo, so that rules out a great deal of what I would say, LOL). I don't agree that the answer to this is preemptively telling others that if they object to a source (especially when the source is the bulk of my post) that they need not reply or dismiss others' views so summarily. That only adds to the problem, if the problem is in fact that they feel intimidated, since they are indulging in the behavior they are saying is the problem: intimidating others who dare to think differently.

Edited by Moonhawk
  • Like 13
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Plum said:

Since I only plan to homeschool, I don’t have to read up on all of the latest policy/trends/fads the ps system is up to. I will go out on a limb and say when ps picks up something they go way overboard to the point of losing the original intent. <Insert latest education reform or fad here>

Can anyone give a definition of critical race theory, some good and bad examples of it in ps? What should I look for?

Just so we’re all talking about the the same thing. 

People who criticize CRT will often make the claim that their poor, defenseless (white) children were being baselessly made to feel guilty for the fact that some white people, a long time ago, owned slaves, and that this is bad for the nonwhite children because it's teaching them to be victims.

I guess it's possible some rogue teacher out there is, in fact, instructing children to feel guilty. But there's a few tells that usually make me doubt the whole thing. I haven't actually seen these videos - no time to watch videos today - but I simply can't trust anybody who, say, claims that the materials say one thing but doesn't actually present the material so we can evaluate that claim, or asserts that the teacher said something in class just because that's how they understood what their child reported and apparently did no follow-through to see if the child had just gotten the wrong end of the stick somehow, as children often do.

I mean, my kid once came home and told me that her teacher didn't like her because she had failed to give her a sticker on a handout. It took about five minutes to clear that up and confirm that the teacher had run out of stickers. The next handout got two to make up for it. Same kid once told me that her teacher (different teacher, different grade) had definitely said every number with a 2 in it is even. I didn't post a video on the internet about the craaaaaaazy new math, because I knew she had just misunderstood!

But with some topics, it's like certain sets of parents are eager to turn off their critical thinking skills.

(A related issue is that of literature teaching. If somebody tells me breathlessly that a certain Classic Book has been Removed From The List at a school, but doesn't tell me what it was replaced with - that's the full list, not excerpts! - then I stop listening. They're either not too bright or they think I am, and either way, why bother? I wonder if those people think there is anything worth reading that wasn't written by a white person.)

  • Like 20
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Moonhawk said:

I think if you were looking for actual conversation, saying things like "I'm sure some will, as usual, attack the source" and "I am sure there will be claims that..." isn't the way to go about it, because you are preemptively dismissing objections as being based on bias or "claims".

Now, you can of course reply to me and say that you were just trying to skip the first round of objections and get to the meat of the issue, but the tone used is dismissive of any contrary opinion so that plausible deniability isn't worth much. If you don't see it, I think you may not be ready for actual in depth conversations. Starting off with a link and a vague poke at the bear is not a conversation starter: if you have a position, spell it out yourself without relying on a link and have the rest of us making assumptions of what we're actually discussing. Links are for reference or further reading, not a bulk of a conversation opener.

So, I don't see this as a genuine conversation starter, as much as a controversy stirrer. Which can be fun, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather get into a lively debate over the best type of frosting or if we're responsible for putting random stray carts into the the cart corral at the store. I'm sure some will, as usual, think that fondant is actually edible but it certainly isn't... 😛 

eta: had a sentence fragment. plus added a sentence.

Chocolate fondant is not only edible, it is delicious. 😋 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

That article listed above paints it very differently than what Katie described it as.  Or what Wikipedia shows, or the ABA website or this article  https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-attack/2021/05

 

I assume you meant me. And yes, you picked a deeper and more nuanced article to quote (I didn’t go through the OP’s links), but the base still holds. History (and law and many policies) is/are inherently biased. 

In a classroom it’s going to be seen mostly in a history curriculum. But it might apply on any topic of race. In many cases the issue is more generational poverty than it is race, but you can find bias & racism nearly everywhere. Fox News would like to deny this, or pretend people stating this are just victims, but it isn’t true. 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fritz said:

Nope, not at all. Although I did not say "I'm so sure" . Go ahead argue away that this is not what CRT really is. I have noticed the dismissiveness of some on this board to deflect by slamming the source rather than speak to the topic at hand.

Is that because "the source" of this story that says the cultural revolution "pitted students against one another and their teachers" is the prime example of a deplorable propaganda source in this country that does the same thing they hypocritically criticise 24/7?

Good god. Faux News is populism run amok. They out to look in the mirror and repent for the damage they've done to this nation.

Bill

 

Edited by Spy Car
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moonhawk said:

 

So, I don't see this as a genuine conversation starter, as much as a controversy stirrer. Which can be fun, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather get into a lively debate over the best type of frosting or if we're responsible for putting random stray carts into the the cart corral at the store. I'm sure some will, as usual, think that fondant is actually edible but it certainly isn't... 😛 

eta: had a sentence fragment. plus added a sentence.

Twice I read this as random stray cats before my brain and eyes decided to work together. It would certainly make those cart corral debates more interesting and would give a whole new meaning to herding cats. 😂🤣🐈🛒

  • Like 1
  • Haha 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tanaqui said:

 

(A related issue is that of literature teaching. If somebody tells me breathlessly that a certain Classic Book has been Removed From The List at a school, but doesn't tell me what it was replaced with - that's the full list, not excerpts! - then I stop listening. They're either not too bright or they think I am, and either way, why bother? I wonder if those people think there is anything worth reading that wasn't written by a white person.)

So much THIS! That drives me crazy and I see it all of the time these days. I see the claim that such and such book from removed from the curriculum but then we find out (after the fit throwers have already moved on to the next outrage) that one teacher didn't reach it that year or something like that. 

I follow #DisruptTexts on Twitter. Ive appreciated their perspective on literature but I've learned so much by how people react to them. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

So much THIS! That drives me crazy and I see it all of the time these days. I see the claim that such and such book from removed from the curriculum but then we find out (after the fit throwers have already moved on to the next outrage) that one teacher didn't reach it that year or something like that. 

I follow #DisruptTexts on Twitter. Ive appreciated their perspective on literature but I've learned so much by how people react to them. 

The real problem is that if it weren't for their need to throw a fit, they wouldn't normally know what books were on their child's classroom curriculum or even that a list existed at all.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

This is what I am trying to figure out.  Seems like there is a lot of confusion over what CRT actually is.  I mean is there an actual course in schools teaching 'CRT'?

My understanding is that you have to begin by first understanding what is meant by Critical Theory.  

I found a course description from a Philosophy department about Marx and Critical Theory.  https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1314S/PHIL/PHIL-366-1314S

I think this is why crt in the classroom is concerning to conservative parents...because marxism is at the core.  

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious if anyone here either lives in that school district or has been following what's been going on there. I know a woman who teaches high school history there, but I haven't been brave enough to email her and ask because she appears to be trying to stay out of it. The school board meetings look like a riot is about to break out and many of the parents seem really angry. It's like they poked the momma bears and it's not going to end well. A teacher who stood up at the school board meeting was fired and then reinstated by a judge. Other teachers are complaining about training that requires them to aknowledge their privilege. This is a very large district and I'd love to know the whole story.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Katy said:

I assume you meant me. And yes, you picked a deeper and more nuanced article to quote (I didn’t go through the OP’s links), but the base still holds. History (and law and many policies) is/are inherently biased. 

In a classroom it’s going to be seen mostly in a history curriculum. But it might apply on any topic of race. In many cases the issue is more generational poverty than it is race, but you can find bias & racism nearly everywhere. Fox News would like to deny this, or pretend people stating this are just victims, but it isn’t true. 

Yes, I meant you, sorry I misspelled your name.  🙂

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Library Momma said:

The real problem is that if it weren't for their need to throw a fit, they wouldn't normally know what books were on their child's classroom curriculum or even that a list existed at all.

I agree with this. The local teachers really get upset because parents who would normally never give a rat's behind about the curriculum, and can't be bothered to attend even a simple parent/teacher conference, show up at school board meetings riled up and "loaded for bear" as the saying goes, because fox news said aura yada yada. Infuriating. And believe me, in this conservative district they are NOT trying to make white kids feel guilt. But given the lack of diversity around here, they are discussing it a little in history classes so their graduates will not be ignorant when they hit college campuses. I am getting to where I take parent complaints around here with a grain of salt because it is a constant crying wolf situation.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, mom2scouts said:

I'm curious if anyone here either lives in that school district or has been following what's been going on there. I know a woman who teaches high school history there, but I haven't been brave enough to email her and ask because she appears to be trying to stay out of it. The school board meetings look like a riot is about to break out and many of the parents seem really angry. It's like they poked the momma bears and it's not going to end well. A teacher who stood up at the school board meeting was fired and then reinstated by a judge. Other teachers are complaining about training that requires them to aknowledge their privilege. This is a very large district and I'd love to know the whole story.

Loudon is one of the wealthiest counties in the country. It is an exurb of Washington, DC. Many people there know someones who are someone and they like to throw that around. There are also students in poverty whose parents service the aforementioned demo in one way or another. The parents with resources come from all over the world. They were often privileged in their home countries (which is why they are in DC) and they want what they want (which is the hassle-free, excellent, free educational opportunities that their property taxes pay for). It does not include any effort to confront or address or acknowledge any of these privileges/advantages. Efforts to make their children aware of the advantages that have been afforded, over time, in America to people of wealth and privilege are unwelcome. To be fair, it’s a very expensive place to live too, so people who have these resources may not even feel privileged. They are. The public schools are, overall, some of the best in the nation.

 

ETA: Forbes says it is *the* wealthiest county.  Which is why, again I say, y’all are being played. My bestie lives in that district(no kids) and we have been up there many times. Bugattis and Maseratis are not an uncommon sight. https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewdepietro/2021/03/08/the-richest-counties-in-the-us-by-state/amp/

 

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Laurie said:

My understanding is that you have to begin by first understanding what is meant by Critical Theory.  

I found a course description from a Philosophy department about Marx and Critical Theory.  https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1314S/PHIL/PHIL-366-1314S

I think this is why crt in the classroom is concerning to conservative parents...because marxism is at the core.  

 

But what do YOU mean or understand CRT to be about? I keep seeing people saying how concerning it is, with links to why other people say it’s concerning, but without saying anything themself about what they believe it means or why it is specifically problematic. You have at least shared a reason, but not enough for me to understand what it is about it that you are concerned about, other than that Marx introduced an idea of critical theory, so CRT must be bad?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Laurie said:

My understanding is that you have to begin by first understanding what is meant by Critical Theory.  

I found a course description from a Philosophy department about Marx and Critical Theory.  https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1314S/PHIL/PHIL-366-1314S

I think this is why crt in the classroom is concerning to conservative parents...because marxism is at the core.  

 

That’s not even close.

A critical theory is ANY theory critical of another theory, as opposed to a stand alone theory.  From your own link “ A "critical theory" has a distinctive aim: to unmask the ideology falsely justifying some form of social or economic oppression—to reveal it as ideology“

 

Marx’s theory is a theory that is critical of capitalism.  ….That does not mean that every critical theory is somehow Communists and bad. That class is simple a view of Marx through the lense of his theory being a critical theory.  Meaning you can’t study Marx without studying capitalism.  Also from your link …”  Any prospects for change, reform, or for Marx, revolution requires first that people come to see capitalism for what it is“.  You can’t criticize (in the academic critical thinking sense) what you do not understand.  

Du Bois is credited with thinking up CRT and the thing he was criticizing was the idea that race is biological and black people were inferior.  He believed race was socially constructed not a biological fact.  He is criticizing that view, and rightly so. 

Edited by HeartString
Additions
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

To the point of the opening post, just because someone lived through a horrific sort of oppression doesn't mean they can't then also participate in oppression of others. I read Maus by Art Spiegelman with my class this year - it's a memoir of the author's conversations with his father about the Holocaust. One of the things we discussed is how he shows how his father - a Holocaust survivor - goes on a long winded diatribe about how horrible and lazy all Black people are and calls a particular Black person names. That doesn't make him less of a victim of oppression or undermine that the Holocaust was violent and terrible. Same for the Cultural Revolution.

If teachers start making the kids write big character posters instead of doing... any other schoolwork and send them to beat up their grandmothers and haul in all the antiques in town in roving bands in the name of CRT, I promise I'll eat my words. But I don't see it happening. No one reasonable does.

  • Like 23
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laurie said:

My understanding is that you have to begin by first understanding what is meant by Critical Theory.  

I found a course description from a Philosophy department about Marx and Critical Theory.  https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1314S/PHIL/PHIL-366-1314S

I think this is why crt in the classroom is concerning to conservative parents...because marxism is at the core.  

 

K, as that's my alma mater, and I majored in economics while there, and thus know well just how very extremely non-marxist the orientation of the economics department (when I was there, I had to take a course at another university so as to learn the Marxist critique of the US system, which I thought to be important to round out my understanding of the content area; and I was not able to count the credits toward the major)... I bit.

That course was

  • offered once
  • by a visiting professor
  • in 2014
  • by --- as you note -- the philosophy department, not the content area being "critiqued"

 

Critical theory just means "closely examining assumptions and premises and omissions and missing people along the way." 

That's it. All else is commentary (or furious backlash at the suggestion episodes like the Tulsa Race Massacre should be covered as part of our history).

Charlie Sykes (who was once counted, and still counts himself, as "conservative") did a succinct little roundup a few weeks ago on how the label is being instrumentalized by opponents that I found very instructive.  "Both sides" and all that.

 

 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, HeartString said:

That’s not even close.

A critical theory is ANY theory critical of another theory, as opposed to a stand alone theory.  From your own link “ A "critical theory" has a distinctive aim: to unmask the ideology falsely justifying some form of social or economic oppression—to reveal it as ideology“

 

Marx’s theory is a theory that is critical of capitalism.  ….That does not mean that every critical theory is somehow Communists and bad. That class is simple a view of Marx through the lense of his theory being a critical theory.  Meaning you can’t study Marx without studying capitalism.  Also from your link …”  Any prospects for change, reform, or for Marx, revolution requires first that people come to see capitalism for what it is“.  You can’t criticize (in the academic critical thinking sense) what you do not understand.  

Du Bois is credited with thinking up CRT and the thing he was criticizing was the idea that race is biological and black people were inferior.  He believed race was socially constructed not a biological fact.  He is criticizing that view, and rightly so. 

To the Bolded I agree! What is in those links is no where close to what CRT actually is.  

From this Link

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/teacher-confronts-loudoun-county-school-board-progressive-agenda

She joins a growing number of parents and educators who are speaking out against the controversial critical race theory, which opponents argue is a divisive curriculum that teaches adolescents to judge one another by the color of their skin.

"Students, you are on the front lines of these indoctrination camps. Challenge the staff when you are presented with a ludicrous statement, and do not allow anybody to tell you that you cannot accomplish anything because of your skin color, or to hate yourself because of your skin color," Vanetsyan intoned. "Students, it is up to you to be the next generation of victims, or victors."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pam in CT said:

K, as that's my alma mater, and I majored in economics while there, and thus know well just how very extremely non-marxist the orientation of the economics department (when I was there, I had to take a course at another university so as to learn the Marxist critique of the US system, which I thought to be important to round out my understanding of the content area; and I was not able to count the credits toward the major)... I bit.

That course was

  • offered once
  • by a visiting professor
  • in 2014
  • by --- as you note -- the philosophy department, not the content area being "critiqued"

 

 

 

 

I don't understand the ha ha face you left for me.   

And you didn't need to defend your alma mater on account of me.  I used a concise definition of a course on Critical Theory and Marxism that I found using a search engine.   Some of the explanations of CT are too long-winded about the Frankfort School, etc.   So I used the one I found.   I was not in any way trying to paint your alma mater as a marxist institution, and l agree with you that it's good to have a well-rounded education.  Studying a subject doesn't mean you necessarily embrace it...I get it.   

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold up. 

People in a school have a responsibility to the children in their care. Damn right nobody in a school should be saying negative things about ANY student cohort, based on an unchangeable or protected characteristic. In fact, nobody should be generalizing about a group of students, or an individual student, at all.

CRT is a valid academic theory. Like all academic theories, application in the non-academic world can be well or poorly understood, well or poorly presented. 

There are some very poor CRT 'based' programs in schools. That doesn't make CRT bad, but it sure as heck doesn't mean we turn our backs on low quality pedagogical approaches, and we sure as heck listen to parents, and don't dehumanize ANY of the children in our care. 

It's absolute b/s defending some of the garbage programs that have been leaked - most of which come out of elite areas/private schools. ( There may be programs using a CRT basis which are consistent with pedagogical values - less likely to garner complaints/be leaked). 

Instead of defending poor instruction, maybe we could agree to get rid, and focus on some real problems. Just yesterday I read a long article about de facto class and race segregation in preschools. That's worth investigating for improvements, not defending low qual programs because 'wah wah wypl'. 

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok after doing some homework here’s what I found. 
 

80% of the country has never heard of CRT-USA Today

CRT grew from Critical Legal Studies (CLS), which argued that the law was not objective or apolitical. CLS was a significant departure from earlier conceptions of the law (and other fields of scholarship) as objective, neutral, principled, and dissociated from social or political considerations. Like proponents of CLS, critical race theorists recognized that the law could be complicit in maintaining an unjust social order. Where critical race theorists departed from CLS was in the recognition of how race and racial inequality were reproduced through the law. Further, CRT scholars did not share the approach of destabilizing social injustice by destabilizing the law. Many CRT scholars had witnessed how the law could be used to help secure and protect civil rights. Therefore, critical race theorists recognized that, while the law could be used to deepen racial inequality, it also held potential as a tool for emancipation and for securing racial equality. American Bar Association Civil Rights 

There are five major components or tenets of CRT: (1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (2) the idea of an interest convergence; (3) the social construction of race; (4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.
 

1)The idea of color-blindness (something Gen X will recognize) and meritocracy are inherently racist 

2)Change only happens when there’s something in it for whites

4) This dichotomy—storytelling and counter-storytelling—is predicated upon the belief that schools are neutral spaces that treat everyone justly; however, close examination refutes this: simply evaluating graduation rates accomplishes this. School curricula continue to be structured around mainstream white, middle-class values. There continues to be a widening of the racial achievement gap (the separation of students of color’s achievement and the achievement of Anglo-Americans). Whose needs do these values and curricula serve? It is not students of color?

5) affirmative action best serves whites

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf
 

Examples in the news…is this or is this not CRT?

The Madison School District has made numerous changes to learning in the district, all in the name of CRT and equity. In high school, the lowest score you will receive on an assignment is a 50, even if you have earned a lower score than 50 or if you fail to turn in the assignment altogether. Most recently, a high school student that fails will no longer receive an F, but instead will receive a “No Pass” which will not count towards their cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA). The District is also debating right now the end to honors classes, which allow children advanced in a subject matter to dive deeper into that subject, because of the “disparities in the demographics of standalone honors” classes.

 

 

In October, Seattle Public Schools unveiled a “framework” to inject “math ethnic studies” into all K-12 math classes, teaching “how math has been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.”

Students will be asked to “identify the inherent inequities of the standardized testing system used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color” and “explain how math dictates economic oppression.”

 

In the nation’s largest school system, a panel appointed by the mayor proposed in August to eliminate the city’s gifted and talented schools and programs in the service of racial integration garnered front-page New York Times coverage.

The proposal would end the practice of gifted and talented schools screening students by exams and grades—and even block considering students’ attendance records at their previous schools.

It also said it was unfair that students who were not fluent in English were “underrepresented” in the most rigorous academic programs.
 

Critical race theorists, analysts and educators say the discipline does not attack individual students for their privileges, but rather, it makes them aware of how different systems in the U.S. discriminate against others.

"If a kid is being taught that they're an oppressor, that means that the person who's doing the teaching is not explaining the difference between people and systems," Bolgatz said. "Racism is a system. ... People are prejudiced, and we can work on our own individual prejudice, but we have to also work on the systems that discriminate writ large." ABC

———

thats all I can post for now for fear of losing it

i think the bolded at the end is the most important thing I’ve read so far. We’re trusting educators and administrators to be able to teach this without making one side a victim and one side an oppressor. I think that’s asking too much. I do not believe they can possibly have a firm grasp of what and how to teach a concept like this in K-12. 

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What low quality program is Loudoun County PS trying to implement that justifies this Cultural Revolution survivor saying that the school system is about to descend into Maoist level oppression? 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Laurie said:

I don't understand the ha ha face you left for me.   

And you didn't need to defend your alma mater on account of me.  I used a concise definition of a course on Critical Theory and Marxism that I found using a search engine.   Some of the explanations of CT are too long-winded about the Frankfort School, etc.   So I used the one I found.   I was not in any way trying to paint your alma mater as a marxist institution, and l agree with you that it's good to have a well-rounded education.  Studying a subject doesn't mean you necessarily embrace it...I get it.   

 

I am not an expert on this, but it appears the course you linked to has nothing to do with critical race theory. There are different kinds of critical theory, looking at all sorts of things. I agree with you that some parents probably would see this, be confused, think that critical race theory must be Marxist, and get upset. Those parents would be wrong, but that wouldn't make them less upset. 

I'm not at all concerned, and would be rather pleased, about school kids being well taught ideas from critical race theory. What I'm worried about is what they will be taught by confused teachers on various sides of the issue. Most of us have a story about something dumb a well-meaning but confused teachers told us. There's so much misinformation going around I'm worried that will happen in this area. For example, I've heard lots of people, including teachers, claim that kids aren't allowed to have Bibles at school. This is false, but some teachers will tell kids this anyway, or that they aren't allowed to mention God in public school assignments. In those areas that have passed laws and resolutions intended to ban the "dangerous ideas of CRT," the things listed in the law/resolution are, in the ones I've read, not actual things that someone who has studied CRT would say. Instead, they are a list of crazy things people are worried that CRT might be. This means that CRT hasn't actual been banned at all, but how many teachers are going to be confused and tell kids "you can't say that," when the kids bring up the moral conflict if the founding fathers owning slaves? Or how many parents will complain to the principal if teachers mention race at all?

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KSera said:

Mostly I’m not seeing people who are upset about it define it at all. The main thing I keep hearing is that they’re going to “teach whites kids to feel guilty for being white.” So I’m wondering @Fritz, since you’ve brought race up many times on many threads and started this one, how do you define critical race theory?

A specific criticism re poor quality pedagogy which claims to be based on CRT ( again, a valid set of academic theories re race/law):

That some programs taught in schools under a CRT umbrella 'label some identities as inherently problematic, and assign perjorative moral values to said identities.'

There is a middle path here - defend, absolutely, the rights of scholars to develop theory around the intersection of race and power AND defend the right of all child-students to be seen, taught and valued as individuals, regardless of race or other characteristics. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Hold up. 

People in a school have a responsibility to the children in their care. Damn right nobody in a school should be saying negative things about ANY student cohort, based on an unchangeable or protected characteristic. In fact, nobody should be generalizing about a group of students, or an individual student, at all.

CRT is a valid academic theory. Like all academic theories, application in the non-academic world can be well or poorly understood, well or poorly presented. 

There are some very poor CRT 'based' programs in schools. That doesn't make CRT bad, but it sure as heck doesn't mean we turn our backs on low quality pedagogical approaches, and we sure as heck listen to parents, and don't dehumanize ANY of the children in our care. 

It's absolute b/s defending some of the garbage programs that have been leaked - most of which come out of elite areas/private schools. ( There may be programs using a CRT basis which are consistent with pedagogical values - less likely to garner complaints/be leaked). 

Instead of defending poor instruction, maybe we could agree to get rid, and focus on some real problems. Just yesterday I read a long article about de facto class and race segregation in preschools. That's worth investigating for improvements, not defending low qual programs because 'wah wah wypl'

 

What does the bolded mean?  And I would like to understand your post in general.  I mean, are there teachers saying negative things about students and using CRT as an excuse?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Farrar said:

What low quality program is Loudoun County PS trying to implement that justifies this Cultural Revolution survivor saying that the school system is about to descend into Maoist level oppression? 

The parent makes the comparison, not me, but all parents have the right to comment on the material being taught to their children, to raise concerns and to be listened to with respect by the school.

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...